This thesis is freely available at http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/13525/1/Anderson_3334.pdf
Laura Bear (an LSE academic and author of Lines of the Nation) has said of it:
Its most original contribution is to our understanding of the formation of early nineteenth century legislation enacted by Cornwallis, Wellesley and Dundas. Importantly this is located in their experiences in the US, Ireland and Scotland. Usually reform of the bureaucracy and state in India in the wake of corruption scandals is described as the sole cause of early policies towards Eurasian populations. Significantly this thesis shows that legislation was directed towards both preventing the emergence of a disloyal settler class (equivalent to those who had recently rebelled in the US) and to the creation of an Indian Empire that could provide opportunities for disaffected Irish and Scottish lower (often rural) classes. Early discrimination against Eurasians was in fact part of a nation-building attempt to render a wide variety of British subjects prosperous and loyal to the crown. This revision is very important. It also shows (although this is not theoretically addressed in the thesis) that British citizenship even at this early stage was simultaneously inclusionary and exclusionary.
Its second most important insight is that it undermines any lingering representation of Eurasian family arrangements and marriages as ‘immoral’ or ‘unconventional.’ Through a careful analysis of the various marriage laws applied to subjects of the crown according to religious affiliations and a discussion of working class practices in Britain it cuts through these Victorian middle class judgments. It shows that it would have been almost impossible for marriages across religion and community to be legitimate under British law in India. In addition many of the domestic arrangements described as ‘immoral’ or ‘temporary’ were in fact long-standing practices among the urban and rural working classes in Britain. This is an important empirical history that has not been described often enough.
Thirdly the thesis unearths fine-grained data about Eurasian employment history during the nineteenth century. Particularly impressive is the material provided on military and medical service, which is often described as almost non-existent in this period. In addition we learn much about the possibilities for Eurasian women, who trained as nurses, teachers and midwifes from early in the century. The data on actual work patterns is placed alongside what are shown to be misleading public debates on what Eurasians could and could not contribute to British rule in India. As a result we acquire a sense of life trajectories that did not fit into these public debates.